Bolton says it could be Obama's fault

13

Replies

  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,023 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    This is a really **** play.
    Hillary:

    Deletes government records. ✓
    Bleachbit and hammers for the servers and phones. ✓
    Pay to play politics. ✓
    Rigged election primary ✓

    Donald:

    Won't release tax records. Oh nooooz!


    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,720 Senior Member
    Donald

    Will not release his tax records
    Praises the man who hacked the DNC.
    Committed fraud against people who signed up for Trump University
    Uses his "Charity" to pay his legal bills and purchase paintings of himself
    Hires a man for his National Security advisor who shared intelligence with foreign military personnel
    Bribed public officials through his charity to avoid lawsuits.
    And for all we know has been lying to us all along about his business dealings, which we would know if he released his tax records.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,023 Senior Member
    Donald

    Will not release his tax records
    Praises the man who hacked the DNC.
    Committed fraud against people who signed up for Trump University
    Uses his "Charity" to pay his legal bills and purchase paintings of himself
    Hires a man for his National Security advisor who shared intelligence with foreign military personnel
    Bribed public officials through his charity to avoid lawsuits.
    And for all we know has been lying to us all along about his business dealings, which we would know if he released his tax records.
    Was he a politician while doing all of this?

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    A sea cucumber might be too advanced a creature for my metaphor for stupidity. I think bleached coral is more apt.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 23,720 Senior Member
    Does it matter? But yes when he praised Putin he was running for office. He was president elect when he hired Flynn.
    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Hillary:

    Deletes government records. ✓
    Bleachbit and hammers for the servers and phones. ✓
    Pay to play politics. ✓
    Rigged election primary ✓

    Donald:

    Won't release tax records. Oh nooooz!

    It really is quite a performance when someone who claims didn't vote for trump defends him at every opportunity. That person really does look like a liar, and based on past lies, likely will be shame-changing his username once again.

    I'm calling this play When Bleached Corals just Lie Around All the Time
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    Speaking of a plea towards reality, about half of the exxon stocks in question aren't subject to the divestiture rules because they won't vest until 2025. So no... not every single bit of his exxon shareholding have to be sold, stupid.

    What could happen is that Exxon does something it says it would never do, allow retiring or leaving employees to keep stocks they aren't fully vested.

    The other thing that could happen is that Tillerson could forfeit those restricted stocks, leaving almost $200 million behind. That would be a monumental and patriotic move from those bastions of integrity called oil company executives.


    To avoid the conflict of interest, Exxon has stated publicly that it is investigating the possibility of vesting all that stock immediately.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    You should read Khan's copy of the Constitution. Pay attention to the Emolument Clause. It's not the "Lefties" that wrote it.

    Can somebody say "Clinton Foundation?"

    Look, I get the ties are worrisome, but if you are going to force somebody in the position of Trump to basically liquidate all his holdings, then you've put up a huge fence against somebody in his position ever serving.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    To avoid the conflict of interest, Exxon has stated publicly that it is investigating the possibility of vesting all that stock immediately.

    When and where did they state this?
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    it's in today's news.

    It's an interesting dilemma. Exxon's vesting periods are incredibly long - designed to ensure that its officers take the long view and everybody applauds. But then, an officer gets tapped to be a Cabinet Secretary, it would be terrible for Exxon to stand in the way of that.

    By the way, put me down as coral. I didn't vote for Trump either. I wrote in McCain for President and Paul Ryan for V.P. - just like John Kasich.
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,871 Senior Member
    tim_s wrote: »
    except running a government or government agency is not and should not be profit driven

    That's not the point, good managers are good managers wherever they may be. The point is that he is qualified but that there are glaring potential conflicts of interest.
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Can somebody say "Clinton Foundation?"

    Sure, but from my unofficial count of the electoral votes so far, Hillary isn't the PEOTUS. My math may be off though. I think a hair-splitting case could be made that foreign government donations to the non-profit CF are not in violation of the emoulment clause. But then again, there was a poster here that requested a return to reality and not hypotheticals.
    Look, I get the ties are worrisome, but if you are going to force somebody in the position of Trump to basically liquidate all his holdings, then you've put up a huge fence against somebody in his position ever serving.

    So what? Fences have gates.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    it's in today's news.

    There's nothing in Exxon's statements today about TIllerson's stocks. Authors of articles today are suggesting that Exxon could do that, but Exxon themselves haven't stated it. Could this be that reading impairment thing you talked about?
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    It's an interesting dilemma. Exxon's vesting periods are incredibly long - designed to ensure that its officers take the long view and everybody applauds. But then, an officer gets tapped to be a Cabinet Secretary, it would be terrible for Exxon to stand in the way of that.

    I agree that Exxon is in a rough place, but it's not Exxon that is standing in the way. Tillerson could make this all go away forfeiting these restricted stocks. I'd even buy a chisel to carve his mug on Rushmore if he did that.

    Edit to add: Tillerson can also make this all go away by refusing the appointment. I don't really believe this is Exxon's problem to solve.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    There's nothing in Exxon's statements today about TIllerson's stocks. Authors of articles today are suggesting that Exxon could do that, but Exxon themselves haven't stated it. Could this be that reading impairment thing you talked about?

    Fair enough. I read it this morning.

    From the WSJ: "The board is weighing the matter now (what to do with the unvested stock), according to people familiar with the matter. Whatever the company decides, the issue is certain to become a flashpoint in what is already expected to be an explosive Senate confirmation process."
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,023 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    It really is quite a performance when someone who claims didn't vote for trump defends him at every opportunity. That person really does look like a liar, and based on past lies, likely will be shame-changing his username once again.

    I'm calling this play When Bleached Corals just Lie Around All the Time

    ^^^Internet tough guy that hides behind the safety of his keyboard and monitor.

    Your funny making such accusations calling me a liar. Actually hilarious since you don't even know what you're talking about. But whatever. If it feeds your inner child and makes you feel better at the end of the day then so be it.

    I wasn't planning to vote at all this year...but ended up deciding to at the last moment. I voted Gary Johnson cuz it wasn't Trump or Hillary.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    ^^^Internet tough guy that hides behind the safety of his keyboard and monitor.

    Are you saying that if I called you a bleached coral to your face that I'd expect some kind of physical confrontation? I would still do it, even if only for the story.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    I agree that Exxon is in a rough place, but it's not Exxon that is standing in the way. Tillerson could make this all go away forfeiting these restricted stocks. I'd even buy a chisel to carve his mug on Rushmore if he did that.

    Edit to add: Tillerson can also make this all go away by refusing the appointment. I don't really believe this is Exxon's problem to solve.

    Tillerson could make it go away, but think of the public policy implications. You're going to ask people to serve in government and give up vast sums of wealth. Do you want that kind of bar to service?

    This is Exxon's problem to solve, simply because Exxon should have foreseen something like this happening and should have understood the public policy implications. Of course, one could say that Tillerson himself should have foreseen something like this so deserves what he gets.
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,023 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    Are you saying that if I called you a bleached coral to your face that I'd expect some kind of physical confrontation? I would still do it, even if only for the story.
    No I'm saying you wouldn't do it in person to me or anyone else for that matter. You're the typical forum guy that hides behind the safety of the keyboard and hurls insults at people because your somewhat anonymous and far away from them.

    Childish antics for someone that is 40 something years old. Why don't you grow up.


    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Tillerson could make it go away, but think of the public policy implications. You're going to ask people to serve in government and give up vast sums of wealth. Do you want that kind of bar to service?

    It is my understanding that Exxon's compensation package is the exception not the rule. This is just one of the speedbumps with appointing current CEOs to government administrative positions, and Tillerson isn't a unique enough snowflake (even with his Order of Friendship trophy). I guess we're about to see the market rate be set for patriotism. FYI, I don' think there's anyway Tillerson's giving up $200m, I think he'd be foolish to do it. I hope Exxon sticks to their rules, and denies the vesting. I think it's a good rule for them.
    This is Exxon's problem to solve, simply because Exxon should have foreseen something like this happening and should have understood the public policy implications. Of course, one could say that Tillerson himself should have foreseen something like this so deserves what he gets.

    So companies should base their compensation on the implications to public policy or to the effect it'll have on their next job if they leave? I think it's Exxon's job to get the best employees possible, and ensure they'll stay. If Tillerson wants to leave and be SoS, it isn't Exxon's problem. (maybe there's some public perception issues at stake, but what does that mean... we'll think oil companies aren't pure of heart?).
  • CuddyCuddy Senior Member Posts: 344 Senior Member
    This is false.
    I met Hex in person once. He called me a barnacle and punched me in the nose.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    No I'm saying you wouldn't do it in person to me or anyone else for that matter.

    You're wrong. I'd absolutely call you a bleached coral in person. I would like to prove this, so can you give me your phone number and address so we can set up a meeting?
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Cuddy wrote: »
    This is false.
    I met Hex in person once. He called me a barnacle and punched me in the nose.

    This is because based on body size, barnacles have the largest penises in the animal kingdom. I was just jealous.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    If it feeds your inner child and makes you feel better at the end of the day then so be it.
    Why don't you grow up.

    You contradict yourself. Lying to yourself what you want to see out of my posting behavior. I'll pray for you.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    I really don't get what you're thinking Hex.

    I understand Exxon's vesting policy (and it is unique) but there should have been an exception for public service in instances such as this.

    If Google had such a policy, would anybody on the Left seriously want Larry Page to say, "Sorry, I'd love to, but I'd be leaving too much money on the table."

    Demanding that somebody make a huge sacrifice to be able to serve is just bad public policy.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,356 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    You're wrong. I'd absolutely call you a bleached coral in person. I would like to prove this, so can you give me your phone number and address so we can set up a meeting?

    sherb will pick him up on the way
  • tim_stim_s Senior Member Posts: 1,952 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    I really don't get what you're thinking Hex.

    I understand Exxon's vesting policy (and it is unique) but there should have been an exception for public service in instances such as this.

    If Google had such a policy, would anybody on the Left seriously want Larry Page to say, "Sorry, I'd love to, but I'd be leaving too much money on the table."

    Demanding that somebody make a huge sacrifice to be able to serve is just bad public policy.



    if we learned anything from **** cheney, putting someone in office who is in position to make themselves or their former colleagues rich is bad public policy
    Fly Fishing in Maine - www.flyfishinginmaine.com
  • NZ IndicatorNZ Indicator Senior Member Posts: 10,023 Senior Member
    Hextall wrote: »
    You're wrong. I'd absolutely call you a bleached coral in person. I would like to prove this, so can you give me your phone number and address so we can set up a meeting?
    Let me know the next time you're in WI. Bring your fat bike. We'll ride, discuss sea cucumbers and bleached coral, have a few beers and call it good.

    Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
  • GoldenladleGoldenladle Super Moderator Posts: 3,878 Senior Member
    Expecting a bunch or billionaires to change the system that made them all billionaires is probably the stupidest bit of wishful thinking in the history of mankind.


    Boy, isn't that the truth


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Moved to Montana, gonna be a dental floss tycoon.

  • GoldenladleGoldenladle Super Moderator Posts: 3,878 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Can somebody say "Clinton Foundation?"

    Look, I get the ties are worrisome, but if you are going to force somebody in the position of Trump to basically liquidate all his holdings, then you've put up a huge fence against somebody in his position ever serving.


    At what point do we as a country demand a certain amount of factual integrity from these guys? Or are we just supposed to go along with the new deal?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Moved to Montana, gonna be a dental floss tycoon.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.